Strong, Independant— Nope, Just a Woman

Strength and independence are two states of existence which most people in the modern world are striving towards, regardless of their gender. Once we advocate because only some women can achieve this status, and even then only if they are continually and persistently practicing a certain lifestyle, we create a further barrier between what men are automatically assumed to be and what woman must work to become. We define if only some women as strong and independent, then where does that leave everyone else - weak and dependent? This perpetuation of gendered vulnerability and internalised rivalry is something we should try to work against, not bringing into the fabric of our everyday lives by disguising it as complimentary.

If the definition of an independent person means to live free from outside control, not subject to another’s authority and unreliant on another for livelihood or subsistence, then the automatic assumption that women can only be independent by choice is highly sexist. Perhaps in the past, when the default position was for a woman to depend on the other people, usually men, in her life, independence was indeed something which needed to be fought for and gained by individuals. But surely our society is no longer founded on these principles? Emotional, financial and bodily independence are all integral aspects of modern life- they should no longer be controversial aspects of feminine and identity.

Perhaps, despite all the many developments in gender equality that have come about for women in recent years, we are still, in some ways, stuck in the prejudiced discourse of the past. We often assume that the norm is for women specifically to be reliant on someone else, when everyone these days depends relatively on one another. In our contemporary society, where fewer people can buy their own property and online connectivity means we are never far away from the nearest point of communication. Independence is not so much something that people inhabit but a habit that they practice in their everyday lives. To be independent is not to be separate from the rest of the world, but to separate oneself when necessary, a balance we should all be striving towards, irrespective of who we define ourselves as.

I find it interesting, too, that one rarely hears a man defined as ‘independent’ - at least not in his romantic relationships or reliance on other people. Perhaps this is because we do not perceive men only in relation to the other people in their lives; instead, they are autonomous individuals who can decide and carrying out certain lifestyles without being labeled as an anomaly of their gender. Men have the freedom of making choices which are detached from their identity, having effectively been given a head start in creating a life of their own. We do not feel the need to label a man as ‘strong and independent’ when he carries out a lifestyle that is traditionally associated with his gender, anyway; history has never compromised their position as someone able to exist on their own.

In a similar way, using the commendation of the ‘strong, independent woman’ solely to differentiate someone from her male counterparts or other females only serves to perpetuate the concept of female rivalry and competitiveness as necessary in the face of male approval. The implication of this image is that only some people have access to the classification that we have made into the prototypical female figure. Does this mean that women who live at home, or women who are in relationships, cannot be strong or independent? Of course not. All it means is that we are still being told, and subsequently listening to, that we can only ever exist within the categories that were created intending to bring us down.

When you type ‘strong, independent woman’ into google, the first results you get are the things that this ‘kind’ of woman doesn’t do, or a man’s idea of what they do. Is this really a conversation we should have? Why are we still shaming women for the decisions that they make, or trying to pressure them into becoming the people we want them to be? Not only are we teaching young and impressionable girls that the only view of them that matters comes from men, but we are imposing further limitations on the person they are, and what they should or should not do to become that. Perhaps inevitably, a supposedly accommodating category of woman was co-opted by others to become something that only serves to perpetuate the discrimination it was traditionally meant to overcome. Either way, women everywhere are once again being put into a position where we cannot win.

Anytime I’ve been called a ‘strong, independent woman’, it has either been as a condescending joke, or a supposed compliment to me not letting other people treat me badly. Considering this phrase was no doubt initially intended to benefit and empower women, it may be controversial to question the legitimacy of it. Yet I can’t help but wonder whether we are doing more harm than good by encouraging exceptionality as the defining feature of who we are trying to be. In this way, we are preventing women from being multifaceted human beings who can be lots of different things at once without compromising their underlying identity. All women are strong, all women are independent- there is no such thing as a ‘strong, independent woman’, there are simply women, and we must all stick together.